Donald Trump factchecked in this week's Investigations segment: is Donald Trump right that the US economy is in the dumps? Or is this, as some Hillary Clinton supporters in the mainstream media parrot continuously, simply TOO negative? I let the math guide me.

Thursday, September 29, 2016

The FBI quietly released on Friday phone conversations between police negotiators and the Orlando shooter that clearly show the shooter’s motive was retaliating for the execution of an ISIS commander by a drone strike. In other words, the FBI and Obama administration deliberately lied and covered up the shooter’s motive, putting out a false narrative that was eagerly repeated by the media.

And, for the first time, an Obama veto has been overridden by Congress. Today Congress overrode Obama’s veto of a bill that would allow families of 9/11 victims to sue foreign sponsors of terrorism. The administration is concerned that it will lead to discovery of Saudi ties to 9/11 but they are also concerned that it would set a precedent that would lead to the US being sued for criminal acts it commits abroad. We look at new accusations that the US coordinated with ISIS militants on airstrikes with Syria and the escalation of war in Iraq as even more US troops join the fight in Iraq.

Sunday, September 25, 2016

No wonder the United States insisted that its Syria ceasefire deal with Russia remain secret! It turns out that one of the US demands was that the Syrian air force must be prohibited from attacking al-Nusra Front (al-Qaeda in Syria).Does this make any sense? It seem much more logical to argue that the threat of being bombed alongside al-Qaeda would be the greatest incentive for “moderates” to separate themselves from al-Qaeda as soon as possible!You would think Washington would tell its “moderates”: “You must cease and desist from fighting alongside al-Qaeda in Syria within the next 48 hours or you will yourselves become targets of Syrian, Russian, and coalition planes.”Instead Washington argues that because its “moderates” refuse to separate from al-Qaeda the Russians and Syrians must stop attacking al-Qaeda!George W. Bush famously said, “either you’re with us, or you are with the terrorists.” But what happens when Washington itself is “with the terrorists”?http://theduran.com/john-kerry-urges-russia-syria-stop-attacking-al-qaeda-video/

I am not a truther. (And as Gore Vidal noted famously) nor am I a conspiracy theorist; I’m a conspiracy analyst. The official story of 9/11 is folklorish and mythological. It’s beyond unbelievable and is, like Napoleon’s definition of history, a set of lies that people have agreed upon. If you’ve never spent any time deconstructing the amazing rewriting of the physical evidence, eyewitness testimony, the laws of gravity, physics, structural engineering, architectural science, piloting, aerodynamics, evidence, common sense — well, you’ve missed one of life’s rare events.

But there’s no evidence of it being a US government “inside job” or false flag or state-sponsored. There. Feel relieved? I know that’s what bothers many Americans, especially those in the Ted Baxter sockpuppet media. I mean, when has the government ever lied about its knowledge or complicity? Heavens! Now, that’s not to say it’s not a possibility or unlikely or even far-fetched. No, certainly not. There’s simply no evidence of it. Nor is there evidence of motivation, goal or intended results or beneficiaries. Cui bono? Cui prodest? I think we know, certainly. But that’s not evidence of anything. Notwithstanding a mountain of fascinating facts and data that scream out for further investigation and review. Think a permanent Russell-Sartre Tribunal of sorts. Anything but the dog and pony show of Congress. And on a personal, individual level, and from having spent my life investigating reality versus “history” I do not believe that President Cheney or his manservant Dubya knew anything in advance or were involved directly in any aspects of our day of horror. Aside from the lack of evidence indicating such, there’s the benefit of plausible deniability and the absolute folly that would involve their involvement. While I believe also that Pearl Harbor was not as recorded or believed, I do not believe FDR was directly involved or had knowledge beforehand. Know when to be detective; know when to be juror. Suspicion versus the weighing of probity. Just because you have an Aha! moment in determining that a piece of evidence as advanced is not what you believe to be true, culpability is not assigned thereafter. Dig?

InfoWars reporter Ashley Beckford explains that the CIA and FBI are inextricably linked to recent terror attacks, including the Chattanooga shooting, the Ft. Hood shooting, the failed underwear bombing and the Charlie Hebdo massacre through their asset, Yemeni-American Muslim cleric, Anwar al-Awlaki, who dined at the Pentagon shortly after 9/11. Al-Awlaki became the first American to be killed by a U.S. drone strike.

Wednesday, September 21, 2016

These testimonies by Syrian soldiers who are fighting the Islamic State rebels (ISIS-Daesh) confirm what we already know.The United States of America is not fighting the terrorists in Syria. The Obama administration, with the support of its allies including Turkey and Saudi Arabia, is supporting the Islamic State (ISIS Daesh)Obama’s counterterrorism campaign in Syria and Iraq is bogus.Read carefully: The testimonies confirm the unspoken truth:OBAMA IS PROTECTING THE TERRORISTS

- We [Syrian soldiers] first thought the aircraft are support to us after the first 2 shots, but we quickly found out that they are targeting our forces aggressively, while we were fighting IS terrorists. The aircraft used cluster bombs against us.

- A day before the airstrikes, the [US] drones were flying and scanning all the area

- The US air-strikes destroyed all our equipment and defense points.

- IS fighters attacked us immediately after and during the US strikes. Some of them were laughing

- US drones and helicopters opened fire from machine guns on our retreated forces

- It for sure wasn’t a mistake, they targeted us intentionally to help IS.

Note: I am sceptical of the account that helicopters opened fire on the soldiers. However ...

There are interviews with the surviving soldiers from the strike that indicate the US attacks were upon well known and fixed Syrian Army positions. Drones observed what was occurring and they should have been able to identify ISIS fighters and their equipment from the regular Syrian Army units that were fighting against them. The most important aspect to consider is that the US forces are illegally intervening in the conflict:Interview to Syrian soldiers survived in Deir Ez zor

By Brian P. McGlinchey A Guantanamo Bay detainee has told U.S. officials that an unidentified member of the Saudi royal family was involved in a Saudi religious leader's effort to recruit him for jihad in the United States, according to a recently-released transcript. In a June 2016 discussion with the Periodic Review Board, which assesses the need […]

Monday, September 19, 2016

Noting the many shortcomings in Bažant's analysis, which have been studied and criticized extensively since 2001, Korol and his colleagues set out to apply a much more rigorous methodology for analyzing WTC 7, which, according to the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), collapsed from normal office fires.

Peer-reviewed science concludes: 'There is no way the building is going to come down.'

Dr. Robert Korol, professor emeritus of civil engineering at McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario, and a fellow of the Canadian Society for Civil Engineering, has led a team of academic researchers in preparing two peer-reviewed scientific papers on the destruction of World Trade Center Building 7. Both papers were published in the Challenge Journal of Structural Mechanics — the first one in July 2015, the second in February 2016.

Prior to publishing these papers, the team of researchers carefully reviewed the work of Zdeněk Bažant, a professor of Civil Engineering and Materials Science at Northwestern University, who had published a paper shortly after 9/11 focusing on the collapses of WTC 1 and 2. Entitled “Why Did the World Trade Center Collapse?—Simple Analysis,” Bažant’s paper presented “a simplified approximate analysis of the overall collapse of the towers of World Trade Center in New York on September 11, 2001.”

Noting the many shortcomings in Bažant's analysis, which have been studied and criticized extensively since 2001, Korol and his colleagues set out to apply a much more rigorous methodology for analyzing WTC 7, which, according to the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), collapsed from normal office fires. As Korol explains, “WTC 7 is a particularly useful example, because there isn't the concern about trying to predict the amount of heat generated by spewing jet fuel and having it ignited within a building. It's the materials within the building that generate the heat release.”

The greater certainty about the material properties involved would allow the team to evaluate whether WTC 7 could have collapsed as a result of burning materials being ejected from WTC 1 and igniting fires on the 12th and 13th floors. The team’s analysis eventually led them to conclude that even with very high estimates for the amount of combustible materials present in office buildings — using the maximum amounts allowed in the building codes — and making many other generous assumptions, such as having two floors “totally ablaze with raging inferno fires,” WTC 7 still would not collapse.

NIST could not have been correct in claiming that such a failure mechanism could have resulted in the collapse.

Korol’s July 2015 paper, “Performance-based fire protection of office buildings: A case study based on the collapse of WTC 7,” used accepted equations associated with thermodynamics and heat transfer to determine how much heat could be generated from office fires. Studying the type of fire that would occur in a typical office arrangement with cubicle partitions, he and his fellow researchers derived the temperature that would have been reached based on the heat release rate of combustible materials identified by NIST and others.

Given that high burn rates do not generally last longer than about 30 minutes and that fires in office buildings do not occur over entire floors simultaneously, Korol says that the assumption of having the entire area of the 12th and 13th floors ablaze was “a ridiculously conservative estimate for the purposes of determining the consequences to the building.” Even then, the researchers showed the temperatures to be insufficient to push a girder off its seat near Column 79, thus disproving NIST’s claim that such a failure mechanism initiated the collapse of the building.

In the subsequent February 2016 paper, “The collapse of WTC 7: A re-examination of the “simple analysis” approach,” Korol considered the “virtually impossible circumstance” that the building experienced an inferno on two adjacent stories simultaneously. Noting that collapses do not occur instantaneously, Korol explains that even if two-thirds of the columns in a building are somehow “wiped out by virtue of the high heat, then the remaining one-third would still be sufficient to prevent collapse.”

According to Korol, Bažant assumed that any possible collapse would only be localized in the form of a plastic hinge; however, Korol’s team went further in terms of assessing the capacity of the columns. “Whereas Bažant assumed that there was only bending energy, we say these columns were resisting load axially — and Bažant ignored that.”

Dr. Korol has done extensive research on the axial loading properties of steel columns and beams. He appeared in the documentary “9/11 in the Academic Community,” and is seen here in his laboratory in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.

Korol’s team painstakingly analyzed what would happen if WTC 7 experienced fire-induced failures of more than two-thirds of the columns on both floors 12 and 13. The researchers performed lab tests to determine the amount of resistance for the upper block of WTC 7 to come down to the floor level of story 13. Assuming that the floor slabs of floors 12 and 13 were so hot that the concrete was pulverized without any applied load (an unrealistically generous assumption), the only energy associated with the structure in those two stories would have been that of the 26 columns that had not yet failed. Accounting for the remaining amount of resistance in the building, Korol et al. found that while the 11th story would collapse, there was still enough remaining energy in the building that the structure would not fail below that point.

“There is no way the building is going to come down.” ~ Dr. Korol

Korol and his colleagues also undertook tests at McMaster University with regard to pulverization of concrete that is typically specified for floors incorporating ductile steel to restrain lateral motion. He explains, “Crushing is not an effective way of transforming brittle material into pulverized material. When you combine that with the 82 columns, there is no way the building is going to come down.”

Dr. Korol and his team are not yet done with their work. They are now conducting a study of the potential for fire-induced collapse of steel-framed office buildings in general, using a 50-story building as an example. The study will examine eight different fire scenarios, four of which will consider 4 adjacent stories experiencing raging fires as might be conceived from airplane strikes at various height locations. This work builds on the research described in the two papers discussed here — and none of the scenarios being studied has resulted in a complete building collapse.

The question that remains to be answered is whether Korol’s peers in their engineering community will begin to pay attention — or if they will, instead, continue to accept on blind faith NIST’s fantastical explanation for the destruction of WTC 7.

Oh my God: https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/...A Clinton adviser/staffer whips up a piece with a writer designed to discredit crazy "Tea Party" conspiracy theorists who believe in Rothschild/Federal Reserve/Rockefeller/US government collusion. The hilarious thing is, the Clinton Email Archive shows just that, including close relationships with the Rockefellers and the Rothschild banking family.

Obscene media censorship of Hillary Clinton's deepening Clinton Foundation CORRUPTION and the massive DNC Leaks batch released by wikileaks.org yesterday. The DNC Leaks show inappropriate pay-to-play at the highest levels of government; DNC staffer Seth Rich was murdered shortly after sending the files to Wikileaks, researchers believe. Members of the media digging into Hillary Clinton's filth during this election cycle are falling victim to unsolicited psychological harassment, weird threats, pressure from higher-ups, and worse. Unacceptable and must stop. All Americans deserve to know what's in DNC Leaks AND what's in Hillary Clinton's skeleton-filled closet. Don't believe me? ASK your friends and family who work in media—very strange atmosphere suddenly.